- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a featured article nomination that was successful. Please do not modify it.
Destruction of Despayre
(5 Inq/2 User/7 Total)
Support
- Darth Culator (Talk) 20:50, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
--Eyrezer 04:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
The planet's kerploding! - Lord Hydronium 07:10, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
First FA I've seen from Culator (I think), and just the subject matter I would expect from him. I demand more FAs from you. Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:03, 26 April 2008 (UTC)- Actually he did Zsinj, too.--Goodwood
(Alliance Intelligence) 05:34, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Certified by the desk of Ataru. Atarumaster88 (Talk page) 13:28, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Green Tentacle (Talk) 18:19, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Oppose
- Toprawa:
- A few preliminaries before I go through this thing in its entirety:
"Conflict" and "Date" infobox fields must be sourced- Done. The Operation Skyhook bit is a remnant from before I started on it.
It would be pertinent to give a mention in the BTS of how Star Wars: Rebellion, which starts 1 day after Yavin, includes Despayre as a still-intact planet, while giving an encyclopedia entry of being the Death Star's construction siteToprawa and Ralltiir 21:05, 20 April 2008 (UTC)- Also done. Good catch. This is why I love peer review. 1131 words now. :-) -- Darth Culator (Talk) 21:17, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
The sectioning would work better if the target selection and preparation were combined into one section. --Eyrezer 07:59, 22 April 2008 (UTC)- See if it's better now. Sectioning is one of my weaknesses. Took me a week to get the headers on Zsinj right. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 12:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- That was an improvement; however, I don't think a sub-subsection is required. I've edited it how I think it works best, renaming the first section "Preparation". That meant removing a quote though. Perhaps this article would work well with a quote page seeing as there are so many good ones. I also removed the pic of Tagge and did some reshuffling. If you dislike it, we can discuss on IRC. --Eyrezer 00:57, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- Works for me. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 01:00, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- That was an improvement; however, I don't think a sub-subsection is required. I've edited it how I think it works best, renaming the first section "Preparation". That meant removing a quote though. Perhaps this article would work well with a quote page seeing as there are so many good ones. I also removed the pic of Tagge and did some reshuffling. If you dislike it, we can discuss on IRC. --Eyrezer 00:57, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- See if it's better now. Sectioning is one of my weaknesses. Took me a week to get the headers on Zsinj right. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 12:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- The entire article seems to consist of paragraphs that are merely two-three sentences long. Consider merging some of these to create larger paragraphs, or expand them enough to warrant being paragraphs of their own. --Imperialles 19:08, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not certain how that's really an issue. The paragraphs can't be expanded since the facts are all there already. The sequence of events is described in a logical order, and the paragraphs are separated by intermediate steps in the sequence. Are you telling me to add useless padding? Seems contrary to our objective. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 22:37, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- No, I'm telling you to merge paragraphs so that the article doesn't look like a list. --Imperialles 05:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
- I've got them as combined as they can reasonably be. Rearranging them any further would be disruptive. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 13:44, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
- FWIW, I think the paragraphs are fine. As long as they're a logical organization and not excessively small or disjointed, I see no problem with reasonable numbers of short paragraphs given the sparse nature of the subject matter. Atarumaster88
(Talk page) 20:15, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
- Objection overridden by Inquisitorius 12:50, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
- FWIW, I think the paragraphs are fine. As long as they're a logical organization and not excessively small or disjointed, I see no problem with reasonable numbers of short paragraphs given the sparse nature of the subject matter. Atarumaster88
- I've got them as combined as they can reasonably be. Rearranging them any further would be disruptive. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 13:44, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
- No, I'm telling you to merge paragraphs so that the article doesn't look like a list. --Imperialles 05:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not certain how that's really an issue. The paragraphs can't be expanded since the facts are all there already. The sequence of events is described in a logical order, and the paragraphs are separated by intermediate steps in the sequence. Are you telling me to add useless padding? Seems contrary to our objective. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 22:37, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- From the desk of Atarumaster88
Please identify Fortressa by name earlier.- Good idea. Done.
That doesn't seem to be the standard location to place the Death Star campaign template and I'm getting some weird effects on the edge of the template anyway. Please move it.- I don't know that there's necessarily a standard location for those. I don't much like it anyway, as it's one of very few bits left from before I overhauled the article. If you can think of a better place for it, please put it there.
I seem to recall something about all the prison guards on Despayre being transferred or not transferred . . . my memory is vague on the matter, but if it's in Death Star, please add it.- Didn't have to check Death Star, Fact Files provided a convenient reference. Really the only thing in there that I didn't have already.
- Have a Super Terrific Friendly Un-frustrating day. Atarumaster88
(Talk page) 20:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
- I always do. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 04:17, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Comments
- Let's get these things out of the way:
1,0821,3881,494 words, of which zero percent is padding.- The images are the images, there's nothing to be done to improve them—I mean it. The only one I didn't post-process myself was uploaded by another one of our image experts.
- I'm quite attached to my page number references, and I consider any objection to them to be a protest against the fundamental meaning of referencing in favor of laziness.
- It has already passed GAN, though that means little in the long run really.
- And I fully expect our length requirements will eventually change to disqualify it (unless the FAN refinements end up adding some cushioning), but I need proper FAN practice for the major nominations I have coming down the pipe. (Cue ominous foreshadowing music.) -- Darth Culator (Talk) 20:50, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Motion to strike objection 3
It was resolved a week ago, and the article has 5 Inqvotes. Imp is acting as an unnecessary roadblock to multiple FANs and it needs to stop. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 22:00, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
The paragraphs are fine. Joining them together further would be unnecessary. Green Tentacle (Talk) 23:22, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Lord Hydronium 23:25, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
With the understanding that Imp's objections are not always "unnecessary roadblocks". Atarumaster88 (Talk page) 23:32, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Let's move it along. Cull Tremayne 03:28, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
--Eyrezer 03:34, 3 May 2008 (UTC)